Welcome to the
Marriage Builders® Discussion Forum

This is a community where people come in search of marriage related support, answers, or encouragement. Also, information about the Marriage Builders principles can be found in the books available for sale in the Marriage Builders® Bookstore.
If you would like to join our guidance forum, please read the Announcement Forum for instructions, rules, & guidelines.
The members of this community are peers and not professionals. Professional coaching is available by clicking on the link titled Coaching Center at the top of this page.
We trust that you will find the Marriage Builders® Discussion Forum to be a helpful resource for you. We look forward to your participation.
Once you have reviewed all the FAQ, tech support and announcement information, if you still have problems that are not addressed, please e-mail the administrators at mbrestored@gmail.com
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 3 of 5 1 2 3 4 5
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 17
S
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
S
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 17
No, I actually understand your point quite clearly.

My idea of "nice" is a general term for other qualities: polite, gentleman, and a good listener. Yes, being nice is a quality that "a good man" should/would have.

I used the terms, "nice" and "mean," loosely...while applying my sense of humor...which I guess...didn't convey.

When I said "mean," I am thinking of qualities such as rude, inconsiderate, and selfish.

My connotations for these words, I'm sure, differ from other's.

smile

Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 363
R
Member
Offline
Member
R
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 363
SDCW, I'd like to know what are your usual pre-screening questions.

Mine are badly upfront-- I have to ask them again whether they are divorced or single and never been married because a lot of people call themselves 'single' when they are actually 'divorced'.

Other than that, I ask what they do for a living. Many are without jobs or are in between jobs or retiring.

Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,345
A
Member
Offline
Member
A
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,345
Originally Posted by SDCWman
2. There is something in between being too "nice" (sycophantic, fawning, hyper-agreeable) and being "bad" (a jerk, a boor, a user). It is called being a gentleman who is also a playful, fun-loving, interesting, and high-value alpha-man. No one is suggesting abusing or mistreating anyone, but rather being mysteriously interesting, mischievious, and flirtatious. Women are not attracted to guys who fall all over themself to suck up to her and be "nice". Mr. Super Nice Guy ends up her FRIEND (if anything), not her BOYFRIEND.

I think what you mean by a "super nice guy" is a doormat. I agree, no one likes a doormat (except for someone who is emotionally codependent).

But I will stand by my thoughts of "different strokes for different folks" - some women may like the alpha males, some do not. To generalize that all women want the alpha male is as silly as saying that all men want a barbie GF. Some do, some don't.

When I meet a flirtatious woman, I run the other way. Been married to one, not going to be stupid again smile.

AGG


Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,638
S
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,638
Originally Posted by RuffledNOT
Mine are badly upfront-- I have to ask them again whether they are divorced or single and never been married because a lot of people call themselves 'single' when they are actually 'divorced'.

This is an important distinction for you? I consider myself "single" and/or "divorced". I only really clarify one or the other based on the context of the conversation. I don't think that they're necessarily mutually exclusive. I take the view that divorced people are by definition "single", but not all single people are divorced, obviously.

A square is a rectangle, but not all rectangles are squares... wink

Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,531
T
Member
Offline
Member
T
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,531
Can't speak for Ruffled, but it is definitely important to me that a guy has been previously married vs. never married. Of course, both are single, but the divorced guy has been through it before. Also, perhaps I'm a little prejudiced but if nobody's married him by the age of 40, you've got to wonder why not.

Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 639
S
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 639
Originally Posted by RuffledNOT
SDCW, I'd like to know what are your usual pre-screening questions.

Mine are badly upfront-- I have to ask them again whether they are divorced or single and never been married because a lot of people call themselves 'single' when they are actually 'divorced'.

Other than that, I ask what they do for a living. Many are without jobs or are in between jobs or retiring.

Ruffled,

I agree that this can be a touchy subject. No one wants to waste their time with someone they consider to be manifestly "incompatible" or has "too much baggage" for their tastes. Certainly no one should EVER date someone married who is posing as "single". Whether being divorced (and how long divorced) is a deal-breaker or not for you is a personal decision that only you can answer for yourself. [For example, whether divorced, widowed, or never-married, I am very leery of dating a single mom. I know it is not entirely fair to make broad assumptions, so I will consider it if I am otherwise comfortable. Tough call...]

But, over-doing the quest for information (from a male perspective) really comes across as rude and demanding. No one likes to feel like they are on "an interview", submitting their "resume", or having to "jump through hoops" on a first date. It really kills any chance for fun-loving spontaneity and emotional connection/attraction when you feel "grilled".

Don't expect to "find out everything" right away. Let the conversation flow naturally and work it in subtly by showing interest in the other person.
"Tell me about your family..."
"How is your work going? How did you get into that career?"
"Love to hear more about XXX..."


xWW:
Secret LTA w/ thrice married OM at her workplace; EA/PA starts ~ 2005-6
Files & completes D - 2007, OM/OMW#3 D - 2007, Affairage - immediately thereafter
Disappears in 2006 w/o even a goodbye to anyone, Never a paragraph of real truth ever spoken
Me/xBH:
M "for life", Suspicions (denied) & desperate Plan A latter-half '06
1st D-day 1/07, full truth D-day 7/08 (all via 3rd parties)
NC w/ xWW 8/08-date, better off w/o unrepentant vileness, betrayal, & rampant deceit in my life anymore
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 639
S
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 639
Originally Posted by Seabird
Originally Posted by RuffledNOT
Mine are badly upfront-- I have to ask them again whether they are divorced or single and never been married because a lot of people call themselves 'single' when they are actually 'divorced'.

This is an important distinction for you? I consider myself "single" and/or "divorced". I only really clarify one or the other based on the context of the conversation. I don't think that they're necessarily mutually exclusive. I take the view that divorced people are by definition "single", but not all single people are divorced, obviously.

A square is a rectangle, but not all rectangles are squares... wink

Ruffled,

It is of course completely up to you whether or not being previously divorced is OK for you or not but I hope that is not an absolute for you. It helps if you have a 3rd party to give you info (say you are introduced to each other by a mutual friend). Then you can find things out without sounding too pushy.

I have been introduced to a few divorced woman via friends and I generally like to know:
Does she have kids and, if so, how involved is the ex?
How long has she been D?
Circumstances of the D? [touchy]

I am very relunctant to date someone whose ex is heavily involved, someone who hasn't been D 6 months or more, and I WILL NOT DATE someone who was ever a WS. That last one is definitely an absolute, no excuses whatsoever. Since we all know about the "fog" in great detail, I can always tell when someone's marriage ended because they cheated and I will not date any former-WSs, even "truly reformed" ones...no way, no apologies.



xWW:
Secret LTA w/ thrice married OM at her workplace; EA/PA starts ~ 2005-6
Files & completes D - 2007, OM/OMW#3 D - 2007, Affairage - immediately thereafter
Disappears in 2006 w/o even a goodbye to anyone, Never a paragraph of real truth ever spoken
Me/xBH:
M "for life", Suspicions (denied) & desperate Plan A latter-half '06
1st D-day 1/07, full truth D-day 7/08 (all via 3rd parties)
NC w/ xWW 8/08-date, better off w/o unrepentant vileness, betrayal, & rampant deceit in my life anymore
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 363
R
Member
Offline
Member
R
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 363
Quote
Can't speak for Ruffled, but it is definitely important to me that a guy has been previously married vs. never married. Of course, both are single, but the divorced guy has been through it before. Also, perhaps I'm a little prejudiced but if nobody's married him by the age of 40, you've got to wonder why not.

Yes, I need to distinct whether the person has been married or not because the divorceds and never marrieds are different in outlook. Other than knowing this, I don't prejudice either... people remain single or are divorced for various reasons and I'd be interested to know the person's story.

Someone mentioned Western and Asian communication style a few posts ago-- whether I find Westerners blunt. Old school Asian is subtle (or roundabout) in their delivery, the younger ones can be blunt. But hey, everyone can still be polite and thoughtful, whether they like the person or not. It reflects on their character and maturity.

On the dating website, I find a better experience communicating with Westerners because we talk about common interests first. With Asians, I feel l'm being checked out like a horse: how's her teeth, eyes, tail, what kind of nightie I wear to bed, do I paint my toenails, do I wear a watch to work, etc.. lol.

Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 199
G
Member
Offline
Member
G
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 199
Originally Posted by SDCWman
Originally Posted by Seabird
Originally Posted by RuffledNOT
Mine are badly upfront-- I have to ask them again whether they are divorced or single and never been married because a lot of people call themselves 'single' when they are actually 'divorced'.

This is an important distinction for you? I consider myself "single" and/or "divorced". I only really clarify one or the other based on the context of the conversation. I don't think that they're necessarily mutually exclusive. I take the view that divorced people are by definition "single", but not all single people are divorced, obviously.

A square is a rectangle, but not all rectangles are squares... wink

Ruffled,

It is of course completely up to you whether or not being previously divorced is OK for you or not but I hope that is not an absolute for you. It helps if you have a 3rd party to give you info (say you are introduced to each other by a mutual friend). Then you can find things out without sounding too pushy.

I have been introduced to a few divorced woman via friends and I generally like to know:
Does she have kids and, if so, how involved is the ex?
How long has she been D?
Circumstances of the D? [touchy]

I am very relunctant to date someone whose ex is heavily involved, someone who hasn't been D 6 months or more, and I WILL NOT DATE someone who was ever a WS. That last one is definitely an absolute, no excuses whatsoever. Since we all know about the "fog" in great detail, I can always tell when someone's marriage ended because they cheated and I will not date any former-WSs, even "truly reformed" ones...no way, no apologies.
The comment about being reluctant to date anyone with an ex heavily involved is intrguiging to me. Can you expand upon that?

I guess my question comes because I do not understand the meaning. I fully support a man/woman being involved with their children after divorce. However, if the ex is heavilty involved with the ex-spouse (Phone calls, lunch dates, whatever) I can see an issue.

I know there is no really right answer as each person has their own measuring sticks, but I am interested in your viewpoint here.


grindnfool
M-13 years
D-Day 10/26/06
Divorced 11.2007
DS-16, DD-9
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 5,860
T
Member
Offline
Member
T
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 5,860
"Also, perhaps I'm a little prejudiced but if nobody's married him by the age of 40, you've got to wonder why not. "

Why is nobody wants him/her worse then nobody wanted to keep him/her?

Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 5,860
T
Member
Offline
Member
T
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 5,860
""I only really clarify one or the other based on the context of the conversation. I don't think that they're necessarily mutually exclusive. I take the view that divorced people are by definition "single", but not all single people are divorced, obviously""

Only a person that has never been married should use the term single. Because it implies that. Why? Because a single person never has to clarify that statement any further.

If a widowed person say's their single. They are hiding the fact that they were married.

If a divorced person say's their single. They are hiding the fact that they were married.

There are two types of lies. Commission and Omission.

Commission is to deliberately lie.

Omission is to lie by hiding the truth.

For some never being married or being divorced is just as must of a red flag and a deal breaker as having kids.

Imagine when a person say's I'm single, and have children. Doesn't that set off the Red Flag. Has kids, are they divorced, widowed? If not those then single and never married but had kids Red Flag.

So to those that say single is ok for every one with and without a past. Don't you see how it can be very misleading?



Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 192
W
Member
Offline
Member
W
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 192
Originally Posted by TheRoad
Why is nobody wants him/her worse then nobody wanted to keep him/her?

Well, to me being married ONCE and divorced ONCE just means *one person* didn't want to keep him/her, whereas not having been in a long term, committed relationship either means that *nobody* was interested in being with him/her OR that he/she is so picky that *nobody* lived up to his/her standards.

I can live with one person not wanting my sweetie. smile

Multiple divorces or break-ups from relationships lasting longer than say 3 years would also leave me wondering. And the death of a spouse is, to me, not a red flag concerning my prospect's relationship skills, just maybe necessary to figure out how they're dealing with their grief.

Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,531
T
Member
Offline
Member
T
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,531
Originally Posted by TheRoad
"Also, perhaps I'm a little prejudiced but if nobody's married him by the age of 40, you've got to wonder why not. "

Why is nobody wants him/her worse then nobody wanted to keep him/her?

I had a bad experience with a NMNK guy which I believe was partly due to the lack of common ground between us. (he also turned out to be a stalker which certainly didn't help matters). You know, there are just so many guys out there, you have to screen somehow. Someone who has BTDT is just that much more likely to have things in common with me.

I also understand the ex-involvement issue. Even if it is about the kids, it means that if you get into a relationship with that person, you are also taking on the ex - as in a 3-person relationship. It may not be the same as an A in that you aren't competing for affections, but that 3rd person is still there.

We are talking about dating. You can be as discresionary as you want - and it's probably better if you are. IF you do meet someone that you want to develop a relationship with, you are going to discover many not-so-attractive qualities about them anyway (we all have them). So why take extra burdens up front?

And regarding the term "single" - I wouldn't go so far as to call someone a liar because they put single vs. divorced or widowed. However, I would probably assume they were never married and, therefore, they'd fail my screen.

Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 5,860
T
Member
Offline
Member
T
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 5,860
"And regarding the term "single" - I wouldn't go so far as to call someone a liar because they put single vs. divorced or widowed. However, I would probably assume they were never married and, therefore, they'd fail my screen. "

When there is deceptive advertising, how is it truthful?

But if they called themselves single without clarifying that they were widowed or divorced you consider them to be truthful when they hide their past behind the word "single"?

So is it not better for all not to play games with something as important with ones past that will have the potential to be immediate deal breakers?

Either your single as never married, widowed, or, divorced. With the added disclaimer on children.

And as you stated by them hiding there past behind a word. In your case they would be missing out on those that want a divorced rather than single person status.

Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,531
T
Member
Offline
Member
T
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,531
I don't know that it is necessarily "deceptive". Perhaps they are sensitive about it and don't want to share that information with complete strangers. Maybe they prefer to bring it up when they actually meet someone in persons. I've heard some talk that some people think divorcees, especially women, are easy. Some people might want to protect themselves from predators by not disclosing this to all. Yes, they run the risk of someone like me screening them out - but maybe they don't want someone like me. Honestly, there are enough non-married (single, divorced, widowed) people out there that you really can afford to use a broad brush with your initial screening.

Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 639
S
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 639
Originally Posted by grindnfool
The comment about being reluctant to date anyone with an ex heavily involved is intrguiging to me. Can you expand upon that?

I guess my question comes because I do not understand the meaning. I fully support a man/woman being involved with their children after divorce. However, if the ex is heavilty involved with the ex-spouse (Phone calls, lunch dates, whatever) I can see an issue.

I know there is no really right answer as each person has their own measuring sticks, but I am interested in your viewpoint here.

Grindn,

The following is MY TAKE only and there are of course no "hard and fast rules". With those caveats, [NO :twobyfour:] here is how I view this...

If someone you view as a potential relationship partner (PRP) is divorced, they have an ex-spouse and an ex-lover. If they had kids together, they have to co-parent in some way (unless the ex has fled the scene completely or has lost all custodial rights).

Ideally, co-parenting should be loving towards the kids and cordially apathetic towards each other -- nothing more. I find it heartbreaking and so unfair to children when parents divorce. I know that if your S cheats and leaves, the BS has no choice and cannot be held responsible for the family's breakup. The whole situation is so sad and frankly, (not having kids myself) I almost never date women with kids because I do not have to and because I prefer not to deal with these issues.

As for the relationship with the ex, if:
1. There are kids involved, see above...
2. There are not kids involved, I wonder "why do you have ANY relationship AT ALL with your ex?" See below...

We all know Dr. Harley's position on NC FOR LIFE with a former-lover in an affair situation. Any contact brings with it the possibility that a romantic R may re-emerge. It seems all the more possible & likely to me that this would occur with an ex-spouse.

In fact, I wonder why, in a "no kids" situation, anyone would want or allow ANY contact with their ex-spouse? It seems to me that either someone didn't take their vows very literally [it didn't "work out", so let's be "friends"] OR someone is still hanging on/making themselves available for the possibility of "something maybe happenning in the future."

PERSONAL EXAMPLES

My WW/xWW has said/written at various times things like "I had hoped we could be friends or at least friendly..." & "know that I am just a call away..." I have made it very clear in response to her that "our vows were to be HUSBAND & WIFE FOR LIFE and I will not degrade them or condone what you are doing by EVER BEING YOUR 'FRIEND'; I will not be 'just a friend' even if/when the A ends. It is ALL OR NONE." I will never contact her again and I will never accept "social" platonic invitations from her under any circumstance.

I have briefly dated 2 divorced women (one had kids, one didn't) who told me "We are divorced but my ex and I remain good friends!" -- in each case it was said enthusiastically as almost a badge of honor. Even cutting the mom a little slack, Big redflag for me! Why?
Did you leave/cheat on him and you are now trying to keep him close in your life?
If he left/cheated on you, why (other than the possibility of reconciliation) do you want him closely involved in yours?

I asked them about it and heard their (unsatisfactory) explanations--both were definitely too socially close to their ex's for my comfort...I didn't call either one of them for a 3rd date.....








xWW:
Secret LTA w/ thrice married OM at her workplace; EA/PA starts ~ 2005-6
Files & completes D - 2007, OM/OMW#3 D - 2007, Affairage - immediately thereafter
Disappears in 2006 w/o even a goodbye to anyone, Never a paragraph of real truth ever spoken
Me/xBH:
M "for life", Suspicions (denied) & desperate Plan A latter-half '06
1st D-day 1/07, full truth D-day 7/08 (all via 3rd parties)
NC w/ xWW 8/08-date, better off w/o unrepentant vileness, betrayal, & rampant deceit in my life anymore
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,638
S
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,638
Originally Posted by TheRoad
So to those that say single is ok for every one with and without a past. Don't you see how it can be very misleading?

Nope. Not at all. Not even a little bit. Again, "single" status means nothing more to me than "unmarried". Assuming that if someone refers to themselves as such even though they are divorced or widowed, then they must be hiding something, imposes a judgment on them. You are always free to follow up with the question: "Have you ever been married?".

Not everyone is going to automatically adhere to your definition of "single", and I don't think it's fair to assume they would and chalk it up to deceit when they don't.

My current, full status is divorced and "attached" in an exclusive relationship. Still, in casual conversation with friends or acquaintances I might refer to myself as "single". I'm not trying to hide anything. You will often hear divorced folks refer to themselves as "single -again-". Where is the deception in that? The word "again" clearly implies a past M (or serious relationship).

Beware setting yourself up for feeling deceived by others when there was no clear attempt to do so. Sometimes I see on this forum in particular that people who've been burned by deceit in the past, will tilt at windmills all over the place. This isn't directed at you specifically Road - just a general caution and observation. It's important that we do our own due diligence on the people we get involved with as well.

As for SDCWman's points re contact with the XS... I totally agree. I have two kids and contact with the XW is required. However, I try to be very sensitive to my GF's concerns. She asked me early on if there was ever the possibility of me and the XW getting back together. I told her no, but more than that, I recognize that it will be an on-going concern for her. At least for as long as the ex and I have to communicate regularly. Over time, I have tried to assuage her fears and I do keep personal distance with the ex. I think she is involved currently, but I suspect that she would love nothing more than for us to be "the best of friends". I don't think she understands the need for boundaries and it's very important for her to be liked and well-regarded by everyone.

I try to inform my GF of any contact that the ex and I have w/re to my kids. I understand that my GF's fears can come back if the ex and I ever become friendly.

Firstly, I have NO desire to be friends with my ex, and I have told the ex this. I am willing to coparent with her, and I have expressed my willingness to work with her on visitation while she recovers from some health issues. Her good health is a concern for me as it relates to my children, but that's it. If we didn't have children together, she could fall over backward into a coffin and I wouldn't shed a tear or even consider attending her funeral. I wouldn't want her coming to mine either.

That's not bitterness speaking. I just don't give a damn except for where my kids are concerned.

Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,257
A
Member
Offline
Member
A
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,257
very well said Seabird!

I also don't want either of my ex's back but need to be friendly and converse with him about our children forever and ever Amen. Such is life. I choose to always define myself as divorced because that is what I am. I live with no regrets. (And by saying that I am NOT implying that anyone on this thread is...let me state that before someone jumps in and assumes that I am. It is my own personal statement.)


Me, 43
DS18, DD12
Divorce final May 10, 2007
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,531
T
Member
Offline
Member
T
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,531
Actually, Seabird, you raise an important point. The term "single" to me implies that you aren't in an exclusive relationship of any kind. It would be deceptive to have an exclusive BF/GF yet list yourself as single. This applies whether you have never been married, divorced or widowed.

Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,638
S
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,638
List myself -where-??? Consider this scenario:

I'm having lunch with some coworkers. We're talking about making plans for the holidays. One coworker mentions having to travel to see his in-laws. He is not looking forward to it. I reply casually and off-handedly, "That's the nice thing about being single again. I don't have to deal with in-laws anymore."

Am I being deceptive? If so, how so? My point is there are several ways to view the world, and not all of them are mutually exclusive. We're not -just- unmarried people on the prowl for a new SO.

If listing myself on a dating profile and there is a choice for "Divorced", then I will of course pick that one over one that says "Single". However, I see no harm in referring to myself as "single" in casual company where there is no attempt or desire on my part to date anyone in that group.

Another example... Facebook, to my recollection, has no entry in the personal info section for "divorced" or "widowed". It's not a dating site, though I understand that some people do use it to that end. The selections are, again as I recall; single, in a relationship, and married. I am listed as "in a relationship" with a link to my GF. However, if I was unattached, would listing myself as "single" be deceptive, even though "divorced" isn't a choice?

Honestly, I really do think that some people are looking for dragons where there are none.

Page 3 of 5 1 2 3 4 5

Link Copied to Clipboard
Forum Search
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 1,254 guests, and 50 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
Mike69, petercgeelan, Zorya, Reyna98, Nofoguy
71,829 Registered Users
Building Marriages That Last A Lifetime
Copyright © 1995-2019, Marriage Builders®. All Rights Reserved.
Site Navigation
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5